Doctor Who is a CHILDREN/FAMILY show.
Firegazer
Posts: 5,888 Forum Member
✭
If you are angry just because there were kids in the episode then you are obviously not part of the show's target audience, it's as simple as that.
Just remember who the show is aimed at. Be pleased.
Just remember who the show is aimed at. Be pleased.
0
Comments
Well, it used to be, back in the 60's, 70's and 80's. Not so sure, nowadays.
Maybe these two are being lined up for a new spin-off kids' show with JLC.
Instead, they were written like Kelsy from Invasion Of The Bane, and we all know what audiences thought of her!
Threads telling people what they can and can't think, and countless posts telling people what opinions to have is going to achieve nothing.
Was Adric considered a kid?
Even so, they killed him off anyway.
I don't mind children in Doctor Who, but the ones last night couldn't act to save their lives.
Compare that with whoever played the Queen of Years in The Rings of Akhaten. She was pretty good at acting considering her age.
I do think the dislike for the kids was over-the-top though. I didn't like how they were introduced, but their acting didn't bother me.
She's Aled Jones' daughter.
I think that's fair enough though. It is a family show, and some aspects will be aimed more at the adults in the room than the kids, and vice versa.
We don't have to enjoy the show for the same reasons.
No it isn't/wasn't. It is a BBC Drama, if it was a childrens' programme it would be made for CBBC from the childrens' budget.
However it was (and to my knowledge still is) made by the drama department, and it is, as always aimed at families
However, it's not the young actors' fault. It' s the fault of the writers, who cannot write appropriate dialogue for young kids (I'm looking at Neil and Stephen here).
Very disappointing!
There have been some really superb performances from child actors on Doctor Who. Daughter of Mine in Family of Blood and CAL in Silence in the Library were both very well-acted. If there was a problem with the kids in Nightmare in Silver, I'd put it down to writing and direction. After all, they didn't write their own lines; the bratty characterisation of Angie was obviously how the writer and director intended it.
This. I think it was originally made by the Serials department; it was never intended for kids; but for general audiences.
Obviously Dr Who is supposed to be for a general audience and it generally has been. But 7b has really moved into poor childrens TV territory with the lack of emotional depth, cliche, plot chasms and all the rest.
Susan? (A season and a half)
Vicki? (A season)
Dodo? (Half a season)
Jamie? (Nearly three seasons)
Adric? (A season and a half)
Lots of kids have been on the show for a long, long time. And these were 40+ episode seasons for Susan, Vicki, Dodo and Jamie.
Dialogue was a problem at times....but so was the acting. It was a combination.
Of course you can also blame the casting agent, the director and perhaps the editor.
Then in case I don't see you, good afternoon, good evening and good night.
The last time I heard a pathetic insult along those lines, I was about 12.
I grew up. I suggest you do too.
So, they needed the child character to be pushy and belligerent, and so that's what they made her. Sure, the actress wasn't able to provide much more layering, but that's to be expected from a young actress.
They were a plot point - a device used to explain why they were there. Also a way to introduce the golden ticket, ooh so that's 2 plot points for the price of 1. And I am not even including the whole cybermen harvesting children's brains to use their imagination for future upgrades, because that would be 3 plot points that justifies the children's presence.